Mark Sanchez is overvalued right now by the NFL (1 Viewer)

[LHUCKS]

I don't like to get into too much predraft chatter because I think the experts like Mayock and Kiper know a lot about what they're doing, but I speak up when I see something that is ludicrous. For example, I was the main person in this forum that pointed out that Tennessee's selection of Chris Henry was the most ridiculous draft pick in recent memory...I knew this because I watched every single carry of his pathetic college career.

Although Mark Sanchez may someday be a viable NFL QB, there is no way he is top 10 material. He threw the ball inconsistently and his decision making was inconsistent as well given the protection he was afforded. Further, he has marginal athleticism. I'm not a long-winded post type, but these three areas make him feel much more like a 2nd or 3rd round QB to me.

Just wanted to go on record and state that Mark Sanchez is a huge reach if selected in the top 10.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

wow and he went to a pac10 school.

Thanks for keeping it schtick free!

 

[NorrisB]

Yeah I feel a little uneasy about Sanchez as well, I just rewatched the USC-Ohio State game and all he really did was manage the game, I thought Sanchez made some good plays and some bad plays, alot of passes were behind the receiver, entire first possession they went three and out after three awful passes from sanchez, and he ended the half with an awful throw that was intercepted in the endzone, which was underthrown by about 10 yards.

He's been an elite prospect since high school where he was the #1 rated NCAA prospect in college football. He reminds me of Tony Romo. He's got that type of erratic play, but great moxie. I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

 

[Kleck]

I thought I heard Colin Cowherd say something again today about Sanchez going #4 to Seattle being a lock.

I guess I don't see him worth that high of a pick either. Especially at #4.

 

[LHUCKS]

I thought I heard Colin Cowherd say something again today about Sanchez going #4 to Seattle being a lock. I guess I don't see him worth that high of a pick either. Especially at #4.

yeah, Herd loves the guy, but that's because he's a blinded USC homer. He talks a lot about how great of a leader he is, and how good he is in interviews...at the end of the day, I want to know if he's going to read the defense and thread the needle...particulary if I'm spending top 10 money on him.

 

[Reaper]

Meh.

Do we really know?

It's in every teams benefit at the top of the draft for Mark Sanchez to be overvalued.

 

[tombonneau]

I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

Funny that you mention his interviews. Everything I've heard & read says that teams have been most impressed with Sanchez's interviewing & charisma. Just comes across as a confident leader.I live in LA and follow USC (not a huge fan or anything though) and think Sanchez is the real deal. As far as that incident with the girl, I suggest reading up on it. Everything I've read it comes across as a pretty BS charge. Certainly nothing red flag worth when you consider it was an isolated incident.

 

[Jason Wood]

LHUCKS,

I get where you're coming from in that, I too, am wary of Sanchez. That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

The cool thing is we'll have our answers soon enough

 

[trader jake]

If an organization feels Mark Sanchez must get on the field because they are making a top 10 selection on him...I'll agree. However, if given a year to develop behind a veteran I think Sanchez will be better than average and has a better chance at long term success than any other rookie quarterback prospect.

Sanchez has the arm, the head, can keep plays alive in the pocket, is a natural leader, has won big games, worked in a pro style offense, and did all of this while leading the big-time football team in a huge market. I'd rather have him than Matthew Stafford myself.

 

[LHUCKS]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion. Somebody is going to completely reach on him.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

Funny that you mention his interviews. Everything I've heard & read says that teams have been most impressed with Sanchez's interviewing & charisma. Just comes across as a confident leader.I live in LA and follow USC (not a huge fan or anything though) and think Sanchez is the real deal. As far as that incident with the girl, I suggest reading up on it. Everything I've read it comes across as a pretty BS charge. Certainly nothing red flag worth when you consider it was an isolated incident.

I usually listen to the Herd when I know that Dilfer is going to be on the show, as he usually has good things to say. He also went off about how impressed he is when Sanchez walks into the room. Says that he has that "it" factor that makes him a leader and locker room presence. Compared him to the greats in that department. Of course he's going to be inconsistant with as few college starts as he has, but that can be fixed. You can't fix whether or not you have that "it" factor though.

 

[brutha]

Funny that you mention his interviews. Everything I've heard & read says that teams have been most impressed with Sanchez's interviewing & charisma. Just comes across as a confident leader.

so did Heath Shuler.Sanchez might be for real, but a 1st round pick on a guy (never mind a high 1st) who has done it for only one year is a really huge (and IMO foolish) risk. oh and this question won't be answered for at least several years.

 

[Enforcer]

For the moment, we have no idea where he is REALLY valued, but we will find out soon. For now teams at the top of the draft have nothing to lose and everything to gain by over-hyping a specific player.

I believe that any interest in Sanchez that is coming from Seattle is only hype trying to drive the market up for his services. I don't think they really want him at all. If Seattle were to draft Sanchez I would be very surprised.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion. Somebody is going to completely reach on him.

What Jason is saying is you haven't seen an NFL Draft Boardroom. Your comments are based off the projections of Kiper, McShay, Mayock, etc....Brady Quinn and Aaron Rodgers were supposed to go very high too. And no one saw either dropping the draft until it actually happened.

 

[LHUCKS]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion. Somebody is going to completely reach on him.

What Jason is saying is you haven't seen an NFL Draft Boardroom. Your comments are based off the projections of Kiper, McShay, Mayock, etc....Brady Quinn and Aaron Rodgers were supposed to go very high too. And no one saw either dropping the draft until it actually happened.

Yeah, but the draft pundits are usually aligned with NFL teams...I guess we'll see if Sanchez is one of those exceptional cases.I fully expect to be bumping this thread in five days.

 

[ookook]

I agree with the sentiment, but perhaps not the prescription.

I would be against spending a top 10 pick, but think he might make more sense in the 21 to 30th range.

But he will surely be gone before then. So yeah, overvalued.

I would rather start Brady Quinn me thinks.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion.

I think the point is your claim that "the NFL" overvalues Sanchez indicates that you know how he is being valued by actual NFL teams, which is something none of us can say until after the draft. I don't think there's any doubt there is concern with him and he is seen as a high risk/reward guy. If for no other reason, we know underclassmen QB's have generally done poorly since the rule change in 1990. In Sanchez case, there are only 16 games to use, so the picture is less clear than normal.My favorite draft preview guy by far is our own local Packers beat writer, Bob McGinn. McGinn is great because he doesn't pretend to know himself how to rate a player, but he relies on confidential and non-confidential sources in the NFL. Here are a couple comments he has on Sanchez:

"Sanchez is probably the riskiest," St. Louis vice president Tony Softli said. "The other guys have been starting since they were freshmen so they got three years in. He has 16 games. That's really scary."

“Stafford has more pure ability than Sanchez but you get to see Sanchez do more,” [former Cleveland GM Phil] Savage said. “He dropped back 3, 5, 7 steps, he did play-action, he did bootleg, he threw from the ’gun, he did screens. He just looks more accomplished than Stafford at this point. When I turned the tape off on Sanchez, I liked him better than (Matt) Leinart. He’s not as talented as Carson Palmer. I thought he fit somewhere in-between.”

 

[awesomeness]

How do you compare him to your favourite stud that is Matt Leinart.

 

[Jason Wood]

LHUCKS, we're not really disagreeing here. I think Sanchez may be overvalued right now too, particularly if the consensus view that he's a top 10 pick comes to fruition. All I'm saying is we can't really be sure NFL teams overvalue him right now, because we haven't seen the draft yet. In a few days, I suspect someone will take him early, and then we'll have our answer.

 

[LHUCKS]

LHUCKS, we're not really disagreeing here. I think Sanchez may be overvalued right now too, particularly if the consensus view that he's a top 10 pick comes to fruition. All I'm saying is we can't really be sure NFL teams overvalue him right now, because we haven't seen the draft yet. In a few days, I suspect someone will take him early, and then we'll have our answer.

 

[LHUCKS]

How do you compare him to your favourite stud that is Matt Leinart.

I know my opinion of Leinart isn't popular in this forum, but I still stand by my statement that he has the talent and ability to be a perennial Pro Bowl QB. I can't say the same for Sanchez.

 

[RBM]

Just wanted to go on record and state that Mark Sanchez is a huge reach if selected in the top 10.

 

[Jason Wood]

Just wanted to go on record and state that Mark Sanchez is a huge reach if selected in the top 10.

I think it's particularly telling that Carroll, who is usually more than willing to endorse his underclassmen, quasi-publicly made it known he thought Sanchez should return to school.

 

[Sweet Love]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion. Somebody is going to completely reach on him.

What Jason is saying is you haven't seen an NFL Draft Boardroom. Your comments are based off the projections of Kiper, McShay, Mayock, etc....Brady Quinn and Aaron Rodgers were supposed to go very high too. And no one saw either dropping the draft until it actually happened.

I agree with the facts, but IIRC, in both years, it was "if they aren't selected by X pick, expect them to drop"...and they did. That was especially true for the Smith/Rodgers draft. This year NEITHER will get by the Jets at 17 (?), and while that would be a drop from top 10, not really comparable to Rodgers or Quinn...there are just too many QB-hungry teams in the top 10 this year. Personally, I think it is a major crap shoot with QBs in general. We were weary at this point last year when it seemed the Falcons were going to get Ryan (in fact, it was genarlly looked on as a desperation pick in response to the Vick fiasco), but it ended up working out for them. I think once or twice every decade there is a guy we ALL believe in that happens to pan out, like the Mannings...but lets be honest here. The top QBs are Peyton (that once in a decade player), Brady (a 6th round pick) and Brees a second rounder. Even Roth was the third QB picked in his class (albiet evey high...or Cutler for that matter). I agree with LHUCKS here in that someone is going to reach for Sanchez and I would have a hard time as a GM crippling my cap with a guy with 16 or so starts at the collegiate level.

 

[switz]

I don't like to get into too much predraft chatter because I think the experts like Mayock and Kiper know a lot about what they're doing, but I speak up when I see something that is ludicrous. For example, I was the main person in this forum that pointed out that Tennessee's selection of Chris Henry was the most ridiculous draft pick in recent memory...I knew this because I watched every single carry of his pathetic college career.

You're really using Chris Henry as your touchstone?

 

[Day Drinker]

How do you compare him to your favourite stud that is Matt Leinart.

I know my opinion of Leinart isn't popular in this forum, but I still stand by my statement that he has the talent and ability to be a perennial Pro Bowl QB. I can't say the same for Sanchez.

I hope you are right, but personally, I am glad we don't have to find out this year. I will say that Leinart definately has the talent and ability to be the best back-up QB in the NFL.....perennialy.

 

[stevegamer]

For the moment, we have no idea where he is REALLY valued, but we will find out soon. For now teams at the top of the draft have nothing to lose and everything to gain by over-hyping a specific player. I believe that any interest in Sanchez that is coming from Seattle is only hype trying to drive the market up for his services. I don't think they really want him at all. If Seattle were to draft Sanchez I would be very surprised.

If they draft Sanchez, the GM needs to be fired. Unlike many of the teams drafting high, the Seahawks don't need a QB, they need their QB to be healthy. (And the OL, but that's another matter).I used the milk Sanchez hype strategy in the mock that currently going on in the Pool - and I think the 'Hawks FO should be able to figure this out as well.

 

[kremenull]

Yeah I feel a little uneasy about Sanchez as well, I just rewatched the USC-Ohio State game and all he really did was manage the game, I thought Sanchez made some good plays and some bad plays, alot of passes were behind the receiver, entire first possession they went three and out after three awful passes from sanchez, and he ended the half with an awful throw that was intercepted in the endzone, which was underthrown by about 10 yards.

He's been an elite prospect since high school where he was the #1 rated NCAA prospect in college football. He reminds me of Tony Romo. He's got that type of erratic play, but great moxie. I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

It's quite funny, or actually not, that NFL evaluators, the guys that actually get paid to do this type of analyzing and grading, say exactly the opposite of what is stated here.....Sanchez is believed to be a superb leader and is one of the best interviews (per NFL teams reports) in recent memory....maybe ever. Personally, I believe he is the top rated QB in this draft, not even a close race really, IMO. The kid is very accurate, mobile, makes great reads and exhibits leadership and toughness (dislocated a kneecap and didn't miss a game speaks volumes to me, I'm just sayin'..... ). The only knock I'd have right now is his low number of starts.....but I can get past that by knowing that at USC, practices can be better than going up against some of their opponents on their schedule and the right organization will not throw this kid in there Year 1, so he should have the benefit of getting developed properly

 

[Apollo]

Yeah I feel a little uneasy about Sanchez as well, I just rewatched the USC-Ohio State game and all he really did was manage the game, I thought Sanchez made some good plays and some bad plays, alot of passes were behind the receiver, entire first possession they went three and out after three awful passes from sanchez, and he ended the half with an awful throw that was intercepted in the endzone, which was underthrown by about 10 yards.

He's been an elite prospect since high school where he was the #1 rated NCAA prospect in college football. He reminds me of Tony Romo. He's got that type of erratic play, but great moxie. I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

It's quite funny, or actually not, that NFL evaluators, the guys that actually get paid to do this type of analyzing and grading, say exactly the opposite of what is stated here.....Sanchez is believed to be a superb leader and is one of the best interviews (per NFL teams reports) in recent memory....maybe ever. Personally, I believe he is the top rated QB in this draft, not even a close race really, IMO. The kid is very accurate, mobile, makes great reads and exhibits leadership and toughness (dislocated a kneecap and didn't miss a game speaks volumes to me, I'm just sayin'..... ). The only knock I'd have right now is his low number of starts.....but I can get past that by knowing that at USC, practices can be better than going up against some of their opponents on their schedule and the right organization will not throw this kid in there Year 1, so he should have the benefit of getting developed properly

From everything I've read, he seems to be "oozing" intangibles. Sanchez will be a top 5 NFL QB under the right system. I know Hawk fans don't want him because he doesn't help the team immediately (I don't blame the fans for wanting to win now), but he can be the cornerstone of your franchise for the next 10-15 years once they move from Hasselbeck (in a year or two?). Sanchez reminds me a lot of Aaron Rodgers. He is accurate, mobile and plays the position very naturally.

 

[identikit]

Yeah I feel a little uneasy about Sanchez as well, I just rewatched the USC-Ohio State game and all he really did was manage the game, I thought Sanchez made some good plays and some bad plays, alot of passes were behind the receiver, entire first possession they went three and out after three awful passes from sanchez, and he ended the half with an awful throw that was intercepted in the endzone, which was underthrown by about 10 yards.

He's been an elite prospect since high school where he was the #1 rated NCAA prospect in college football. He reminds me of Tony Romo. He's got that type of erratic play, but great moxie. I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

It's quite funny, or actually not, that NFL evaluators, the guys that actually get paid to do this type of analyzing and grading, say exactly the opposite of what is stated here.....Sanchez is believed to be a superb leader and is one of the best interviews (per NFL teams reports) in recent memory....maybe ever. Personally, I believe he is the top rated QB in this draft, not even a close race really, IMO. The kid is very accurate, mobile, makes great reads and exhibits leadership and toughness (dislocated a kneecap and didn't miss a game speaks volumes to me, I'm just sayin'..... ). The only knock I'd have right now is his low number of starts.....but I can get past that by knowing that at USC, practices can be better than going up against some of their opponents on their schedule and the right organization will not throw this kid in there Year 1, so he should have the benefit of getting developed properly

From everything I've read, he seems to be "oozing" intangibles. Sanchez will be a top 5 NFL QB under the right system. I know Hawk fans don't want him because he doesn't help the team immediately (I don't blame the fans for wanting to win now), but he can be the cornerstone of your franchise for the next 10-15 years once they move from Hasselbeck (in a year or two?). Sanchez reminds me a lot of Aaron Rodgers. He is accurate, mobile and plays the position very naturally.

yet another

I've seen him in interviews 4-5 times now, and each time I've been impressed with his intelligence and confidence.

A team that can wait a few years before they need him to start could easily have a top 10 QB. Rodgers is the perfect example, as stated above).

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Sure Sanchez has risk, as the hit rate on 1st QBs is barely 50% in the NFL, an imperfect sceince for sure.

However, all pundits that I respect grade Sanchez as a better QB prospect than Matt Lienert. Moreover, Sanchez has a much better work ethic than Lienert.

Look at the quote from Phil Savage -- somewhere in between Lienert and Palmer.

 

[NorrisB]

Sure Sanchez has risk, as the hit rate on 1st QBs is barely 50% in the NFL, an imperfect sceince for sure.However, all pundits that I respect grade Sanchez as a better QB prospect than Matt Lienert. Moreover, Sanchez has a much better work ethic than Lienert.Look at the quote from Phil Savage -- somewhere in between Lienert and Palmer.

L-E-I-N-A-R-T

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

That said, not sure your thread topic really captures the truth. We don't really know if the NFL is overvaluing Sanchez, because we don't know where teams really have him on their boards. We can comfortably say that the draft prognosticators think highly of Sanchez, but do they correlate to what NFL execs are thinking?

I stand by my statement in the title of this thread...the vast majority of rankings/assessments I've seen rate this kid as a high first rounder. Sure there are some teams that are more down on him, but we're generalizing here for the sake of discussion. Somebody is going to completely reach on him.

What Jason is saying is you haven't seen an NFL Draft Boardroom. Your comments are based off the projections of Kiper, McShay, Mayock, etc....Brady Quinn and Aaron Rodgers were supposed to go very high too. And no one saw either dropping the draft until it actually happened.

Yeah, but the draft pundits are usually aligned with NFL teams...I guess we'll see if Sanchez is one of those exceptional cases.I fully expect to be bumping this thread in five days.

Before or after you bump your post about Santonio preparing to get owned by DRC?

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

This is news, or thread-worthy somehow? You gotta love how one guy's opinion (which isn't unlike many others regarding Sanchez, myself included) needs to "go on record". Very important person...

The reason for this thread is less for discussion really -- it's nothing new that people agree or disagree that Sanchez is overrated -- and really just a time stamp for an ego to come back and bump it so he can boast. All in all... and .

 

[LHUCKS]

This is news, or thread-worthy somehow? You gotta love how one guy's opinion (which isn't unlike many others regarding Sanchez, myself included) needs to "go on record". Very important person...

The reason for this thread is less for discussion really -- it's nothing new that people agree or disagree that Sanchez is overrated -- and really just a time stamp for an ego to come back and bump it so he can boast. All in all... and .

Take your haterade elsewhere...it's a shame you feel the need to take away from this messageboard with posts like the one above.

 

[moleculo]

wow and he went to a pac10 school.Thanks for keeping it schtick free!

LHUCKS knocking a USC guy pre-draft, I'm gonna pay attention.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

This is news, or thread-worthy somehow? You gotta love how one guy's opinion (which isn't unlike many others regarding Sanchez, myself included) needs to "go on record". Very important person...

The reason for this thread is less for discussion really -- it's nothing new that people agree or disagree that Sanchez is overrated -- and really just a time stamp for an ego to come back and bump it so he can boast. All in all... and .

Take your haterade elsewhere...it's a shame you feel the need to take away from this messageboard with posts like the one above.

Oh the irony is off the charts here, in that I'm just illustrating why someone that brings only his ego to the table/messageboard, is actually detracting from it. Make no mistake about it, your thread here...is really about you. And you know it. And for those that might not know that (yet), I thought I'd mention it. So I wouldn't call it hate. Nah, I'd call it a public service announcement. :whoosh: You made yours (Sanchez); and I made mine (your self-righteous intent).

 

[Loopdog]

I never see anyone really bring this up but for me, it's so hard to evaluate players who play for insanely talented schools. Like USC for example. Watch their games from last season, and Sanchez is never touched. He just stands back there and waits until someone gets open, makes his read and throws the ball. Look at Matt Leinart in school. Same thing. QB is the hardest position to scout and it requires the most talent around the player to succeed more than any other position on the field. That's the main reason why teams shouldn't invest high picks in QB's generally. I personally think Matthew Stafford is the best QB in this draft, but I wouldn't take him #1 overall if I were Detroit. I think you build through the lines and then start moving out from there. It will be interesting to see where Sanchez goes on Saturday, and whether or not he's put into a position to succeed or fail.

 

[Donnybrook]

Yeah I feel a little uneasy about Sanchez as well, I just rewatched the USC-Ohio State game and all he really did was manage the game, I thought Sanchez made some good plays and some bad plays, alot of passes were behind the receiver, entire first possession they went three and out after three awful passes from sanchez, and he ended the half with an awful throw that was intercepted in the endzone, which was underthrown by about 10 yards.

He's been an elite prospect since high school where he was the #1 rated NCAA prospect in college football. He reminds me of Tony Romo. He's got that type of erratic play, but great moxie. I dont think he's a particularly good leader and I havent liked any of his interviews on TV. He has had an off the field incident with a girl that said she was molested by him.

It's quite funny, or actually not, that NFL evaluators, the guys that actually get paid to do this type of analyzing and grading, say exactly the opposite of what is stated here.....Sanchez is believed to be a superb leader and is one of the best interviews (per NFL teams reports) in recent memory....maybe ever. Personally, I believe he is the top rated QB in this draft, not even a close race really, IMO. The kid is very accurate, mobile, makes great reads and exhibits leadership and toughness (dislocated a kneecap and didn't miss a game speaks volumes to me, I'm just sayin'..... ). The only knock I'd have right now is his low number of starts.....but I can get past that by knowing that at USC, practices can be better than going up against some of their opponents on their schedule and the right organization will not throw this kid in there Year 1, so he should have the benefit of getting developed properly

From everything I've read, he seems to be "oozing" intangibles. Sanchez will be a top 5 NFL QB under the right system. I know Hawk fans don't want him because he doesn't help the team immediately (I don't blame the fans for wanting to win now), but he can be the cornerstone of your franchise for the next 10-15 years once they move from Hasselbeck (in a year or two?). Sanchez reminds me a lot of Aaron Rodgers. He is accurate, mobile and plays the position very naturally.

What are intangibles exactly? The last QB the Hawks drafted that was oozing intangibles was David Greene. He is already out of football.

 

[Donnybrook]

I never see anyone really bring this up but for me, it's so hard to evaluate players who play for insanely talented schools. Like USC for example. Watch their games from last season, and Sanchez is never touched. He just stands back there and waits until someone gets open, makes his read and throws the ball. Look at Matt Leinart in school. Same thing. QB is the hardest position to scout and it requires the most talent around the player to succeed more than any other position on the field. That's the main reason why teams shouldn't invest high picks in QB's generally. I personally think Matthew Stafford is the best QB in this draft, but I wouldn't take him #1 overall if I were Detroit. I think you build through the lines and then start moving out from there. It will be interesting to see where Sanchez goes on Saturday, and whether or not he's put into a position to succeed or fail.

I agree 100 %. Some people are willing to concede that Matt Cassel might be overrated due to playing in New England but less seem to be holding Sanchez to the same standard. One can argue that USC is the New England of college football and no one knows exactly how much Sanchez benefited from it.

 

[Dave Larkin]

I am slightly skeptical of Sanchez's sudden rise aswell. It seems like people were waiting for a reason to elevate him on their boards because he is the "sexy", intriguing pick. I haven't seen a whole lot of Sanchez' games in college, but from those I have seen he looked to me like a solid quarterback. He didn't jump out at me with his amazing talent or anything.

I'm not saying Sanchez isn't talented or doesn't have the potential to be one of the more upper echelon quarterbacks in the NFL in the next five to ten years. What I am saying is that to elevate him to top ten status in the draft always seems a little contrived, like people are looking for a "rival" to Stafford, so to speak.

 

[DeCleater]

Sure Sanchez has risk, as the hit rate on 1st QBs is barely 50% in the NFL, an imperfect sceince for sure.However, all pundits that I respect grade Sanchez as a better QB prospect than Matt Lienert. Moreover, Sanchez has a much better work ethic than Lienert.Look at the quote from Phil Savage -- somewhere in between Lienert and Palmer.

L-E-I-N-A-R-T

Until partyboy at least becomes a starter in the NFL nobody cares how he spells his name.

 

[DeCleater]

This is news, or thread-worthy somehow? You gotta love how one guy's opinion (which isn't unlike many others regarding Sanchez, myself included) needs to "go on record". Very important person...

The reason for this thread is less for discussion really -- it's nothing new that people agree or disagree that Sanchez is overrated -- and really just a time stamp for an ego to come back and bump it so he can boast. All in all... and .

Take your haterade elsewhere...it's a shame you feel the need to take away from this messageboard with posts like the one above.

Sonny nails LHUCKS schtick to the wall.... Film at 11.

 

[massraider]

Sure Sanchez has risk, as the hit rate on 1st QBs is barely 50% in the NFL, an imperfect sceince for sure.

However, all pundits that I respect grade Sanchez as a better QB prospect than Matt Lienert. Moreover, Sanchez has a much better work ethic than Lienert.

Look at the quote from Phil Savage -- somewhere in between Lienert and Palmer.

I don't recall anyone questioning Leinart's work ethic in college.

 

[Fiddles]

I never see anyone really bring this up but for me, it's so hard to evaluate players who play for insanely talented schools. Like USC for example. Watch their games from last season, and Sanchez is never touched. He just stands back there and waits until someone gets open, makes his read and throws the ball. Look at Matt Leinart in school. Same thing. QB is the hardest position to scout and it requires the most talent around the player to succeed more than any other position on the field. That's the main reason why teams shouldn't invest high picks in QB's generally. I personally think Matthew Stafford is the best QB in this draft, but I wouldn't take him #1 overall if I were Detroit. I think you build through the lines and then start moving out from there. It will be interesting to see where Sanchez goes on Saturday, and whether or not he's put into a position to succeed or fail.

casserly was saying this last night on path to the draftnot sure how he will react if he goes to a team without a stellar line

 

[LHUCKS]

I never see anyone really bring this up but for me, it's so hard to evaluate players who play for insanely talented schools. Like USC for example. Watch their games from last season, and Sanchez is never touched. He just stands back there and waits until someone gets open, makes his read and throws the ball. Look at Matt Leinart in school. Same thing. QB is the hardest position to scout and it requires the most talent around the player to succeed more than any other position on the field. That's the main reason why teams shouldn't invest high picks in QB's generally. I personally think Matthew Stafford is the best QB in this draft, but I wouldn't take him #1 overall if I were Detroit. I think you build through the lines and then start moving out from there. It will be interesting to see where Sanchez goes on Saturday, and whether or not he's put into a position to succeed or fail.

casserly was saying this last night on path to the draftnot sure how he will react if he goes to a team without a stellar line

Sanchez can throw on the run though...so that helps.

He's a decent prospect, but not good enough to warrant a top 10 selection...like I said, he feels like more of a 2nd or 3rd rounder to me.

 

[AnonymousBob]

I really wouldn't mind SF taking the kid if they picked at the end of the first, but if they take him where they currently stand, I know I won't be the only Niners fan screaming at the television.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Solid thread.

 

[tomarken]

Solid thread.

Solid bump.

 

[Masked Vigilante]

Once again, LHUCKS is wrong.